System and method for detecting network activity of interest

ABSTRACT

A network activity detection system is trained to detect network activities of interest such as threats by malicious computer data. The training involves distilling the characteristics of known network activities of interest (e.g., intrusion by computer viruses, exploits, worms, or the like) into a minimal set of meta-expressions. At run-time, the network activity detection system combines the minimal set of meta-expressions with efficient computer algorithms for evaluating meta-expressions to detect known network activities of interest, as well as their unknown variants, among an unknown set of network activity. The network activity detection system may produce appropriate responses upon the detection of network activities of interest.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION

This application is a continuation U.S. non-provisional application Ser. No. 13/479,222, filed May 23, 2012, which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety for all purposes.

BACKGROUND

1. Field

The present disclosure relates generally to the field of digital security, and more specifically to detecting activities of interest in network traffic, including the detection of malicious network activities.

2. Description of Related Art

The proliferation of computing technologies has presented challenges in the field of digital security. As is well known, a networked computer (i.e., a network node) may spread malicious computer data to other network nodes, thereby inflicting system disruption and possibly economic loss. One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that attacks based on malicious computer data include computer viruses, malware, worms, Trojan horses, bots, intrusions (e.g., unauthorized access), exploits (e.g., escalation of privileges, violation of confidentiality), time-based attacks (e.g., Denial of Service), or the like. The term “threat” is used to describe one or more of these types of attacks.

Digital security technologies may be used to detect and/or remove malicious computer data from network traffic. One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that digital security technologies can reside at various network nodes, can be packaged in hardware and/or software, and can include “anti-virus software”, “malware detection”, “intrusion prevention”, “anti-attack”, firewall, or the like, though the terms are not identical in meaning. The term “Unified Threat Management” (“UTM”) has been used to describe one or more of these implementations of digital security technologies.

Conventional digital security technologies typically detect threats using signatures that correspond to specific threats. Existing designs under this paradigm are deficient in at least two ways. First, the detection of a threat relies on the a priori knowledge of the specific threat and the availability of a signature for the specific threat. For example, conventional digital security technologies may rely on a known signature to detect the presence of a known computer virus. Thus, conventional digital security technologies may not be able to detect threats for which a signature is not yet available. For example, conventional digital security technologies may not be able to detect an unknown variation of a known computer virus.

Second, due to the ever-increasing number of known threats, conventional digital security technologies maintain a growing number of signatures. As incoming network traffic is obtained, the maintained signatures are scanned against incoming data for possible threats. The scanning process uses substantial computing resources. By one estimate, in the context of enterprise level data centers, up to 85% of a data center's computing power may be spent on digital security operations, leaving only a fraction of its true capability to business operations. In the context of consumer computers, it should not surprise even the casual computer user that the operation of anti-virus software can cause a computer to become sluggish.

Despite improvements in the field, conventional digital security technologies continue to be limited by these deficiencies, which are consequences of their design.

BRIEF SUMMARY

In one exemplary embodiment, a plurality of Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) packets and a plurality of Internet Protocol (IP) packets are obtained from network traffic. The obtained network packets include a network activity of interest. A plurality of combined packets is created. A first combined packet of the plurality of combined packets comprises a portion of at least one of the plurality of TCP packets and a portion of at least one of the plurality of IP packets. A second combined packet of the plurality of combined packets comprises a portion of at least one of the plurality of TCP packets and a portion of at least one of the plurality of IP packets. The first and second combined packets are different. A relevant subset of the first and second combined packets is converted into sequences of integers. A similarity metric is determined between the first and second sequences of integers. A third sequence of integers is created based on the similarity metric, wherein the third sequence comprises a third plurality of integers common to the first sequence and the second sequence, in the order in which the common integers were presented in the first sequence. A fourth sequence of integer is created based on the frequency in which the third sequence of integers appears, in the same order, in the plurality of combined packets. The fourth sequence of integers is used to identify network activities of interest in an unknown set of network traffic.

In one exemplary embodiment, a plurality of Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) packets and a plurality of Internet Protocol (IP) packets are obtained from network traffic. A plurality of combined packets is created. A combined packet comprises a portion of at least one of the plurality of TCP packets and a portion of at least one of the plurality of IP packets. A sequence of integers is obtained. If the integers of the sequence of integers appear in the combined packet in the same order, the combined packet is considered abnormal, a network operation is initiated. The network operation may be a user alert, an instruction to cloak a network node, or an instruction to drop a network packet from transmission.

DESCRIPTION OF THE FIGURES

FIG. 1 depicts an exemplary process for detecting network activities of interest.

FIG. 2 depicts a block diagram of a network employing exemplary embodiments of network activity detectors.

FIG. 3 depicts an exemplary process for training a Unified Threat Management System (UTMS).

FIG. 4 depicts an exemplary transmission of network packets between network nodes.

FIG. 5 depicts the layout of an IP packet header.

FIG. 6 depicts the layout of a TCP packet header.

FIG. 7 depicts exemplary values in an IP network packet header.

FIG. 8 depicts exemplary processes in an embodiment of a distance function.

FIGS. 9(A)-(F) depict exemplary network packets.

FIGS. 10(A)-(C) depict exemplary sequences of 8-bit integers.

FIG. 11 depicts exemplary sequences of 8-bit integers.

FIG. 12 depicts exemplary groups of network packets.

FIG. 13 depicts an exemplary computing system for detecting network activities of interest.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The following description is presented to enable a person of ordinary skill in the art to make and use the various embodiments. Descriptions of specific devices, techniques, and applications are provided only as examples. Various modifications to the examples described herein will be readily apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art, and the general principles defined herein may be applied to other examples and applications without departing from the spirit and scope of the various embodiments. Thus, the various embodiments are not intended to be limited to the examples described herein and shown, but are to be accorded the scope consistent with the claims.

The embodiments described herein include techniques for detecting network activities of interest. Exemplary network activities of interest include threats based on computer viruses, malware, worms, Trojan horses, bots, intrusions (e.g., unauthorized access), exploits (e.g., escalation of privileges, violation of confidentiality), timed-based attacks (e.g., Denial of Service), or the like. Exemplary network activities of interest may also include illicit downloads of copyrighted and/or obscene materials via a network.

1. Overview

FIG. 1 illustrates exemplary process 100 for detecting network activities of interest. For purposes of this disclosure, the term “Unified Threat Management System” (UTMS) is used to describe computer security technologies that carry out process 100, regardless of whether the technologies are provided in software form (e.g., as a software package) or in hardware form (e.g., an application-specific circuit or device). Within process 100, block 110 may be referred to as a training process, while blocks 120-140 may be collectively referred to as a run-time process.

At block 110, a UTMS is trained to recognize characteristics in network traffic that are associated with a network activity of interest. For example, the UTMS may be provided with a series of network traffic that reflects a particular, known threat. Such a series of training network traffic may be obtained from, for example, a network packet capture application programming interface (“API”), such as “pcap”. Training network traffic may also be obtained from internet repositories of network traffic, such as from the Openpacket organization. Although the names of APIs and/or repositories may change from time to time, the concept of capturing network traffic should be within the grasp of one of ordinary skill in the art.

At block 110, the UTMS identifies from the training network traffic bounded sequences of computer data that can be used later to identify the presence of the same network activities of interest in another, unknown set of network traffic. In addition, by way of processing at block 110, the UTMS also becomes able to identify the presence of threats that are related to the threat that was previously provided in the training network traffic (i.e., a variant).

At block 120, the UTMS monitors a set of network traffic to determine whether the (trained and related) network activities of interest are present in the network traffic. For example, the UTMS may determine if one node in the network is attempting to attack another network node with a variation of the threat previously provided in the training network traffic to block 110.

At decision block 130, the UTMS determines whether the monitored set of network traffic is normal or abnormal. Abnormal network traffic are those that in which the UTMS has identified a network activities of interest. If abnormal network traffic is found, processing proceeds to block 140, where the UTMS generates one or more appropriate responses. An appropriate response may be a user or system alert. Another appropriate response may be to scrub the response from the compromised network node, such that the intruding network node remains unaware of the “successful” attack. Yet another appropriate response may be to cloak the network node that is targeted for attack, so that the attacking network node can no longer reach the target network node. If no abnormal network traffic is found, processing returns to block 120, and the UTMS monitors another set of network traffic.

FIG. 2 is a network diagram illustrating an exemplary deployment of process 100 (FIG. 1) onto a network. As shown in FIG. 2, desktop and laptop computers 213-216 are connected to cloud network 201 via cable modem 210, firewall 211, and router 212. Cellular phone 222 and tablet computer 223 are connected to network 201, wirelessly, via cellular service provider 220. Data center 231 is connected to cloud network 201 via modem 230. Portions of process 100 may be deployed onto network devices (e.g., firewall 211, router 212), endpoints (e.g., computers 213-216), gateway devices (e.g., modem 210, a gateway), mobile devices (e.g., cellular phone 222, tablet computer 223), or the like. In other words, portions of process 100 can be deployed onto one or more of network nodes 210-216, 220-223, and/or 230-231. For example, process 100 may be integrated into an operating system kernel running on cellular phone 222, tablet computer 223, and/or computers 213-216. Process 100 (FIG. 1) may also be integrated into the hardware of cable modem 210, UTMS 211, and/or router 212.

In the discussion below, the threat of computer viruses is used as an exemplary network activity of interest for sake of simplicity. However, process 100 (FIG. 1) is not so limited. Rather, process 100 may be used by a UTMS to manage many other kinds of network activities of interest, as discussed above. Coincidentally, the (exemplary) discussion of computer viruses highlights the substantial advantages of process 100 in a way that is understandable to many computer users.

At present, over 2 million computer viruses are known to exist. The exact count varies between 2.5 million and 8 million, because different sources of authority catalogue computer viruses differently. At block 110 of process 100, a UTMS may be provided with network traffic that reflects attacks based on one or more known computer viruses. At the completion of block 110, the UTMS becomes trained to detect the presence of those one or more computer viruses, as well as their variants, in network traffic. At blocks 120-140, the UTMS monitors network traffic for the presence of those one or more computer viruses and their variants. In this way, the UTMS is able to manage attacks that are based known threats and their unknown variants.

Process 100 is notable in at least two ways. First, block 110 produces bounded sequences of data that can be used to detect all known computer viruses and their variants. Thus, a UTMS using process 100 need not necessarily rely on the a priori knowledge of a specific computer virus in order to detect the computer virus in network traffic during operation. Second, block 110 produces bounded sequences of data that are efficient in structure and in size as compared to computer viruses signature files that are used by conventional computer anti-virus technologies. Specifically, it has been determined that bounded sequences of data totaling less than 200 (8-bit) bytes are sufficient to identify most, if not all, of the computer viruses presently known to exist under process 100. This size stands in stark contrast to the size of conventional computer viruses signature files, which range from 50 megabytes (MB) to 300 MB in size. To put into perspective, the size of 50 MB is larger than the size of 200 (8-bit) bytes by 5 orders of magnitude. Thus, tremendous computational efficiencies can be realized during operation of a UTMS using process 100.

2. Training

FIG. 3 illustrates an exemplary process 300 for training a UTMS. In one embodiment, process 300 performs block 110 (FIG. 1). At block 310, network traffic is obtained, and a series of network packets that are sent between (i.e., to and from) two network nodes are grouped together. Some or all of the grouped network packets may be consecutive. The concept of “network packets” is well known in the art and is not detailed here. As an example, the term “network packets” may refer to Ethernet packets, Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) packets, Internet Protocol (IP) packets, or the like.

Network packets that are provided to block 310 should include a network activity of interest, for purposes of training a UTMS. In the present example, the network activity of interest is the presence of a computer virus in the network traffic between two network nodes. Thus, the network packets provided to block 310 should represent an attack, by one network node against another network node, using a computer virus, and should also represent the resulting responses from the network node that is attacked.

The grouping of network packets between two network nodes at block 310 is bidirectional because network traffic both to and from a pair of network nodes are grouped together. Bidirectional network traffic typically consists of different levels of communication, from the initial handshake to the full transfer of data between the two network nodes. This grouping of (bidirectional) network packets is based on the existence of an established communication between two network nodes. An established communication between two network nodes is sometimes referred to as a “conversation”. Two network nodes may request to establish a communication via one channel. For example, a host and a server may handshake on one port. Once communication is established, the two network nodes may communicate further through a newly created channel. For example, the host and the server may communicate through TCP/IP on another port that is different from the port through which the established communication was initially requested.

In one embodiment, the grouping of (bidirectional) network packets at block 310 begins with the identification of a network packet in network traffic that represents the beginning of an established communication, and another network packet in the network traffic that represents the end of the established communication. The beginning of an established communication may be a network packet that contains a request. The end of an established communication may be a network packet that contains a corresponding acknowledgment. In one embodiment, additional network packets may be identified, such as a network packet that represents a “request-acknowledgement”. Network packets at different layers of the OSI model may provide request and acknowledgement information. For example, both HTTP network packets (i.e., at the OSI application layer) and TCP network packets (i.e., at the OSI transport layer) contain request fields, either of which is sufficient for purposes of block 310. In this way, block 310 may group together bidirectional network packets that correspond to an established communication without relying on source network addresses and destination addresses. Block 310 may also group together bidirectional network packets that correspond to an established communication without relying on source and destination port numbers.

Block 310 is now discussed with reference to FIG. 4. As shown, network packets 430-460 represent a series of network packets between network nodes 410 and 420. Network packet 430 is sent by network node 410 to network node 420, and includes a request. Thus, network packet 430 indicates the beginning of a series of network packets that are to be grouped together. In this context, network node 410 may be referred to as a host because it initiated a request, and network node 420 may be referred to as a server because it is the recipient of the request. Network packets 440 and 450 are sent by network nodes 420 and 410, respectively, and represent bidirectional communication of data between the two network nodes that should be grouped together. Network packet 460 is sent by network node 420 to network node 410 to acknowledge that an appropriate amount of data has been received. Thus, network packet 460 indicates the end of the series of network packets that are to be grouped together. In this way, network packets 430 to 460 are grouped together at block 310 (FIG. 3) into a bounded group of network packets. This group of network packets is referred to as being “bounded” because there is a clear beginning and a clear end to the group of data. Block 310 may be repeated to produce additional groups of bidirectional network packets between pairs of network nodes.

It should be appreciated that the grouping of network packets, carried out at block 310, also implicitly captures other types of information that are useful for detecting network activities of interest. For example, in a Denial of Service attack (“DoS”), which is a type of time-based attack, a relatively large number of network packets are transmitted over a given timeframe. The occurrence of network packets over a relevant timeframe that result from a DoS attack (or more generally, a timed-based attack) is implicitly captured at block 310 because block 310 groups together those network packets into (bi-directional) conversations. The grouped network packets are then analyzed for information relevant to detecting a future DoS attack by downstream processes in process 300.

Only certain fields within the network packets that are grouped by block 310 are relevant to detecting network activities of interest. At block 320, the relevant information is retained, and extraneous information is discarded. Block 320 is now discussed with reference to FIGS. 5 and 6. FIG. 5 illustrates the layout of an IP network packet, with the fields relevant to detecting network activities of interest circled. These relevant fields include Type of Service (“TOS”) 511, Total Length (of IP network packet) 512, IP Flags 513, Time to Live 514, Protocol 515, IP Options 516, and data content 517. FIG. 6 illustrates the layout of a TCP network packet, with the fields relevant to detecting network activities of interest (e.g., computer viruses) circled. These fields include Sequence Number 611, Acknowledgement Number 612, Offset 613, TCP Flags 614, Window 615, Urgent Pointer 616, TCP Options 617, and data content 618. In this way, the output of block 310 is reduced to contain only information that is relevant to detecting network activities of interest. This retention process is applied to each IP and TCP network packet that is in the groups of network packets produced by block 310. The output of block 320 is referred to as “reassembled packets”.

Three aspects of block 320 are noteworthy. First, block 320 does not retain the source or destination addresses in an IP network packet or the source or destination port numbers in a TCP network packet. Thus, a UTMS using process 300 does not need to rely on network address nor port information in order to detect network activities of interest. Second, Header Length (IHL) 510 (FIG. 5) is used to determine the length of an IP network packet header so that the relevant fields within the IP network packet can be properly grouped, but Header Length (IHL) 510 is not itself retained in the output of block 320. Third, the retained fields are not limited to the detection of computer viruses, which is the network activity of interest in the present example. Rather, the fields support the detection of the full-range of network activities of interest as discussed above.

At block 330, the reassembled packets (i.e., relevant information) from block 320 are converted, bitwise, into integers, thereby producing sequences of integers that correspond to a subset of the information originally provided to process 300. In one embodiment, 8-bit integers are used. One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that IP and TCP network packets contains fields that are less than 8 bits, exactly 8 bits, and more than 8 bits long. Fields that span less than 8-bits are converted to 8-bit representation by padding zeros to the most significant output bits. For example, block 320 converts bits “100” to “0000 0100”. TOS 511 and IP Flags 513 (FIG. 5), which are 4-bit and 3-bit fields, respectively, are converted in this way. Fields that span more than 8-bits are converted into multiple 8-bit segments. For example, block 320 converts bits “0001 0010 0100 1000” to “0001 0010” and “0100 1000”. Data content 517, which spans more than 8-bits, is converted in this way.

Blocks 320 and 330 are now discussed with reference to FIG. 7. FIG. 7 illustrates a portion of an IP network packet. As discussed above, within IP network packet 710, TOS 711 and Total Length 712, among others, are useful for detecting network activities of interest. Thus, fields 711 and 712 are retained by block 320 and are provided to block 330 for conversion to integers. Reassembled packet 714 represents the portions of IP network packet 710 that are retained by block 320. Block 330 converts the contents of reassembled packet 714, bitwise, into 8-bit integers 715, 716, and 717. Note, for sake of simplicity, only a portion of an IP network packet 710 is shown in FIG. 7. During normal operation, block 320 processes the entire groups of IP and TCP network packets produced by block 320, and block 330 in turn processes the entire groups of IP and TCP network packets retained by block 320. In this way, block 330 produces a sequence of 8-bit integers 718 containing the integers “40 1 83 . . . ”. Optionally, sequence of 8-bit integers 718 may be limited to 65,536 (8-bit) integers in length.

As used here, the term “sequence” describes a list of ordered elements, e.g., integers. It should be appreciated that the ordering of elements within sequence of integers 718 is derived from the ordering and adjacency of relevant portions of bidirectional network traffic processed by blocks 310-320. Put another way, to the extent that a network activity of interest produces a characteristic response in network traffic as between two network nodes, that response is captured by the processes of blocks 310-330. The response is further distilled in the processes of blocks 340-360, discussed below, so that it becomes useful for detecting network activities of interest in an unknown set of network traffic.

At block 340, a distance function is used to identify characteristics from the sequences of integers produced by block 330. The distance function is performed against sequences of integers that are adjacent in time, meaning that a sequence of integers produced by block 330 (based on one group of network packets from block 320) is compared against the next, adjacent sequence of integers produced by block 330 (based on the next, adjacent group of network packets from block 320).

Conventional distance functions, such as string distance functions, are well known in the art and are not discussed in detail here. As an example, a conventional string distance function may be used to determine that the strings “a b c” and “z b c” have a distance of 1, because the strings vary only in that “a” in the former is replaced with “z” in the latter, and represents the sole difference between the two strings. The groups of network packets produced by block 330 lend themselves to comparison by distance functions because block 330 produces sequences of integers, which may be treated as individual elements by a distance function. Conventional string distance functions, however, do not provide distance metrics that are sufficient for detecting network activities of interest. For example, the knowledge that two strings differ by a distance of 1 provides little useful information for computer virus detection.

In one embodiment, block 340 performs a custom distance function, described below, that produces reduced sequences of integers that support the detection of network activities of interest. For the sake of simplicity, the custom distance function of block 340 is discussed with references to FIGS. 8 and 9. FIG. 8 illustrates exemplary process 800 for performing the custom distance function, in one embodiment. FIG. 9 illustrates exemplary groups of network packets as they are processed by exemplary process 800, in the one present embodiment.

Turning to FIG. 8, at block 810, the custom distance function identifies integers that appear within adjacent pairs of sequences of integers produced by block 340 (FIG. 3). FIG. 9A illustrates exemplary sequences of integers 910-919. FIG. 9B illustrates exemplary integer “101”, which appears in at least pairs of adjacent sequences of integers 910-911, 911-912, and 912-913. (Note, sequences of integers 914-919 are not illustrated for simplicity.) At block 810, the custom distance function also identifies the first instance of an identified integer in pairs of adjacent sequences of integers. FIG. 9C illustrates the first instance of “101” being identified in adjacent sequences of integers 910-911, 911-912, and 912-913.

At block 820 (FIG. 8), the custom distance function aligns the first instances of the identified integer in a pair of adjacent sequences of integers. FIG. 9D illustrates the alignment of the first instances of “101” in pairs of adjacent sequences of integers 910-911, 911-912, and 912-913.

At block 830 (FIG. 8), a reduced sequence of integers may be created, under some conditions, for a pair of adjacent sequences of integers. A reduced sequence of integers is created (for a pair of adjacent sequences of integers) if one or more of the integers that are common to the pair of adjacent groups of sequences of integers: (i) appears in the same order in the pair of adjacent groups of network packets, and (ii) has positions in the pair of adjacent groups of network packets that are within a first threshold distance. In one embodiment, the first threshold distance is four. If created, a reduced sequence of integers would comprise integers that satisfy requirements (i) and (ii) stated above (with respect to a pair of adjacent sequences of integers).

FIG. 9E illustrates that, when the first instance of “101” is aligned between sequences of integers 910 and 911, the integers “48” and “52” satisfy requirements (i) and (ii) stated above. Specifically, the integers “101”, “48”, and “52” appear in the same order in both sequences of integers 910 and 911. Further, the integer “48” appears in both sequences of integers 910 and 911 within the first threshold distance (of four, in the present embodiment). Thus, as shown in FIG. 9F, reduced sequence of integers 920 is created, and includes the sequence of integers “101 48 52”. Also as shown in FIG. 9F, the integers “101” “48” and “52” in sequences of integers 911 and 912 also satisfy requirements (i) and (ii) stated above. Thus, reduced sequence of integers 921 is created, and includes the sequence of integers “101 48 52”. Also as shown in FIG. 9F, the integers “53” and “101” in sequences of integers 912 and 913 also satisfy requirements (i) and (ii) stated above. Thus, reduced sequence of integers 922 is created, and includes the sequence of integers “53 101”.

Blocks 810-830 repeat for other integers that appear within at least a pair of adjacent sequences of integers. For example, the integer “48” also appears in at least one pair of adjacent sequences of integers among sequences of integers 910-919. Thus, blocks 810-830 are repeated for 8-bit integer “48”.

At the completion of block 830 (which is an exemplary string function carried out in block 340 of FIG. 3), processing proceeds to block 350 (FIG. 3). At block 350, the frequency at which a reduced sequence of integers appears, within a second threshold distance, in the groups of network packets created at block 330 is determined. The first and second threshold distances may be the same or may be different. In one embodiment, the second threshold distance is four. FIG. 10A illustrates sequences of integers 910-919 that were created by block 330. In addition, FIG. 10B illustrates the appearance of reduced sequences of integers 920-922 (FIG. 9F) within sequences of integers 910-919. As shown, reduced sequence of integers 920 (“101 48 52”) appears (within the exemplary second threshold distance of four) in eight out of the ten sequences of integers 910-919. Thus, a frequency of 80% is associated with reduced sequence of integers 920. For the same reason, a frequency of 80% is associated with reduced sequence of integers 921. Note, reduced sequences of integers 920 and 921 do not appear within the second threshold distance (of four, in this example) in sequence of integers 916, because the integers “101” and “48” are separated by more than four positions in group of network packets 916. Also as shown, reduced sequence of integers 922 (“53 101”) appears (within the exemplary second threshold distance of four) in three out of the ten groups of network packets 910-919. Thus, a frequency of 30% is associated with reduced sequence of integers 922. The frequencies associated with reduced sequences of integers 920-921 are illustrated in FIG. 10B. These values, which indicate the frequencies with which reduced sequences of integers appear in order within a threshold distance in groups of network packets, may be referred to by the term “confidence values”.

At block 360 (FIG. 3), reduced sequences of integers having confidence values below a threshold confidence value are discarded. In one embodiment, the threshold confidence value is between 80-90%. FIG. 10C illustrates the discarding of reduced sequence of integers 922. In addition, reduced sequences of integers 920 and 921 (which are the same) are de-duplicated and maintained as reduced sequence of integers 1030. For purposes of this disclosure, reduced sequence of integers 1030 may be referred to by the term “meta-expression”.

Meta-expression 1030 represents the information that is sufficient to detect a network activity of interest within network traffic. Specifically, meta-expression 1030 is sufficient to detect the network activity represented by the initial input to process 300 (FIG. 3). Recall that the input to process 300 (FIG. 3) was a series of network packets that represents an attack by one network node against another network node using a computer virus, and the responses from the compromised network node.

Process 300 (FIG. 3) may be repeated for other types of network activities of interest. For example, process 300 may be performed using network traffic that indicates an attack by computer worm A to identify a meta-expression for detecting computer worm A and its variants. Process 300 may be performed again using network traffic that indicates an attack by computer exploit B to identify a meta-expression for detecting computer exploit B and its variants. Indeed, process 300 may be repeated for different computer viruses, malware, worms, Trojan horses, bots, intrusions (e.g., unauthorized access), exploits (e.g., escalation of privileges, violation of confidentiality), time-based attacks (e.g., Denial of Service), or the like, that are known to exist, in order to determine meta-expressions that can be used to identify those malicious computer instructions, as well as their variants.

Importantly, it has been determined that many different malicious network activities share the same meta-expressions. That is to say, two different network activities of interest (such as a known computer virus A and a known computer virus B) may share the same meta-expression and therefore are detectable using the single meta-expression. Further, a meta-expression that is generated from an existing computer virus, for example, can be used to detect all variations of the existing computer virus, regardless of the permutations, sizes, or characteristics of the variations (i.e., even if the variations are unknown). Only a completely new type of computer virus, and not a variation on an existing computer virus, would not be detected by the existing meta-expression. In this way, a handful of meta-expressions are sufficient to identify many, if not all, of the known computer viruses (which number between 2.5 to 8 million, depending on the source of authority), as well as their variants.

FIG. 11 illustrates 13 exemplary meta-expressions 1100-1112. Meta-expressions 1100-1112 span less than 200 (8-bit) bytes in total, and can be used to detect all variations of the existing computer virus as discussed above. This size stands in stark contrast to the size of a typical database of anti-virus signatures, which is on the order of 50 MB or more. The structure and minimal size of these meta-expressions provide tremendous computational efficiencies as compared to conventional computer security technologies.

3. Run-Time

The efficiency with which network activities of interest can be detected using the meta-expressions provided by process 300 are now discussed. At the completion of process 300 (which is an exemplary UTMS training process carried out at block 110 of FIG. 1), processing proceeds to block 120 of FIG. 1. At block 120, a UTMS utilizes meta-expressions to analyze network traffic, and to detect whether the network traffic is normal or abnormal. Processing at block 120 begins with the grouping of a series of bidirectional traffic between two network nodes. For this purpose, the techniques of block 310 (FIG. 3) may be used. Next, the groups of network packets are filtered for relevant information. For this purpose, the techniques of block 320 (FIG. 3) may be used. Next, the reassembled packets (containing relevant information), which form new groups of network traffic, are converted into sequences of integers. The bit size of the integers used during run-time should be the same as the bit size of the integers used during training. In one embodiment, the integers are 8-bit in size. For purposes of converting reassembled packets into sequences of integers, the techniques of block 330 (FIG. 3) may be used.

The sequences of integers produced by block 330 are compared against one or more meta-expressions to determine if the network traffic that is being analyzed is normal or abnormal. A set of network traffic that is being analyzed is considered “abnormal” when two criteria are satisfied: (i) each integer in the meta-expression is present in the sequence of integers that corresponds to the network traffic, and (ii) each integer appears in the same order in both the corresponding sequence of integers and the meta-expression. Notably, a group of network packets is considered normal at the first instance in which condition (i) fails to hold true. (The failure of condition (ii) is less useful because a sequence of integers may have multiple instances of a particular integer, and all of the instances must fail condition (ii) in order for condition (ii) to fail as a whole.)

When abnormal traffic is detected, the UTMS follows decision block 130 to block 140, where appropriate responses are generated. When normal traffic is detected, the UTMS returns to block 120 and analyzes additional network traffic. Blocks 120-130 are discussed with reference to FIG. 12. FIG. 12 illustrates exemplary groups of network packets 1200-1209 and exemplary meta-expression 1210. Meta-expression 1210 may be one of the meta-expressions that were created during training (block 110 of FIG. 1). The length of meta-expression 1210 is shortened for simplicity. As shown, groups of network packets 1201, 1202, and 1209 contain all of the integers of meta-expression 1210, in the same order in which the integers appear in meta-expression 1210. Thus, groups of network packets 1201, 1202, and 1209 are considered abnormal. Groups of network packets 1200 and 1203-1208 do not contain all of the ordered integers of meta-expression 1210. Thus, groups of network packets 1200 and 1203-1208 are considered normal.

As is evident from the preceding discussion, at block 120, a UTMS performs many integer comparisons. Thus, optimization of integer comparisons is important to the efficiency of the UTMS. Recall that a set of network traffic is considered to be normal at the first instance in which an integer in the meta-expression is absent in the sequence of integers that correspond to the network traffic. Thus, the performance of the UTMS is improved if an early “normal” determination can be made. To this end, it is beneficial to structure the technique of block 120 such that the integer comparisons between a sequence of integers and a meta-expression terminates as soon as one integer from the meta-expression is identified as being absent in the sequence of integers.

In one embodiment, block 120 employs a nested computer programming language expression that returns an overall value of “failure” (e.g., a Boolean value) when any one of the nested levels returns a “false” condition. Thus, as soon as a UTMS identifies the absence of one integer (at any one of the nested levels), processing of the entire nested computer programming language expression terminates. The corresponding set of network traffic is thus identified as being normal (in which case, no additional threat detection is necessary), and a subsequent set of network traffic can be analyzed. For example, the LISP computer programming language allows for a nested expression in the form ((((A) (B)) (C)) (D)) that returns an overall value of “failure” if any one of expressions (A), (B), (C), and/or (D) is “false”. In this example, the expression (A) may query whether the first integer in a meta-expression appears in a sequence of integers, and the expression (B) may query whether the second integer in the meta-expression appears in the sequence of integers, so forth.

At block 140, appropriate responses may be generated. One appropriate response may be a user or system alert that indicates the presence of a network activity of interest. Another appropriate response may be to scrub the response from the compromised network node, such that the intruding network node remains unaware of the “successful” intrusion. Yet another appropriate response may be to cloak the network node that is targeted for intrusion, so that the intruding network node can no longer reach the target network node.

Portions of process 100 (FIG. 1) may be implemented in exemplary computing system 1300 illustrated in FIG. 13. In some embodiments, computing system 1300 is a network device, such as a router, gateway, and a firewall, or the like. In some embodiments, computing system 1300 is a gateway device, such as a modem, or the like. In some embodiments, computing system 1300 is a mobile device, such as a desktop computer, a laptop computer, a cellular phone, a tablet, or the like. In some embodiments, computing system 1300 is a network interface “card”. Notably, the training aspects of process 100 (i.e., block 110) and the run-time aspects of process 100 (i.e., blocks 120-140) may be implemented onto the same, or onto different computing systems.

As shown in FIG. 13, the computing system 1300 includes a computer motherboard 1302 with bus 1310 that connects I/O section 1304, one or more central processing units (CPU) 1306, and a memory section 1308 together. Memory section 1308 may have memory module 1320 related to it. Memory module 1320 may be, for example, a flash memory and/or a removable memory device. The I/O section 1304 is connected to network interface 1312, which receives and/or transmits network packets. I/O section 1304 may be connected to display 1314, input device 1316, and/or storage unit 1318. Memory section 1308, memory module 1320, and/or storage unit 1322 can store (e.g., tangibly embody) computer-readable medium that contain computer-executable instructions and/or data for performing any one of the above-described processes using CPU 1306. The computer-executable instructions may be written, for example, in a general-purpose programming language (e.g., LISP, C) or some specialized application-specific language. Input device 1316 may be a USB port supporting input from USB-compliant devices, such as a keyboard, a mouse, a memory stick, or the like. At least some values based on the results of the above-described processes can be saved into memory such as memory 1308, memory module 1320, and/or disk storage unit 1318 for subsequent use.

Portions of process 100 (FIG. 1) also may be implemented into a processor by way of specifically arranged integrated circuits (e.g., application-specific integrated circuits). In some embodiments, the integrated circuit can be part of the main processor of a device, such as the main processor of a cellular phone. In some embodiments, the integrated circuit can be part of an auxiliary processor of a device, such as a processor that is connected to the motherboard of a laptop. The integrated circuits can contain computer-executable instructions and/or data for perform any one of the above-described processes. The computer-executable instructions may be written, for example, in a specialized application-specific (e.g., processor-specific) language.

In some embodiments, computer-executable instructions based on the C programming language that total less than 1 MB are sufficient to carry out process 100 (FIG. 1). Execution of these computer-executable instructions requires no more than 300 kilobytes (16-bit bytes) of run-time memory (e.g., random access memory). Modern computing systems and/or processors are well capable processing computer-executable instruction of these sizes. Indeed, in these embodiments, network interface bandwidth (i.e., input bandwidth), not processor speed, is typically the gating factor to processing even higher volumes of network traffic.

Although only certain exemplary embodiments have been described in detail above, those skilled in the art will readily appreciate that many modifications are possible in the exemplary embodiments without materially departing from the novel teachings and advantages of this disclosure. For example, aspects of embodiments disclosed above can be combined in other combinations to form additional embodiments. Accordingly, all such modifications are intended to be included within the scope of this technology. 

What is claimed is:
 1. A computer-implemented method for detecting a network activity of interest, the method comprising: (a) obtaining, by one or more processors, a plurality of network packets from a network, wherein the obtained plurality of network packets comprises network packets categorized as Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) packets and Internet Protocol (IP) packets, wherein the obtained plurality of network packets include the network activity of interest; (b) creating, by the one or more processors, a combined packet from at least two network packets of the plurality of network packets obtained in (a), wherein creating the combined packet comprises converting, bitwise, content from a portion of a first network packet and a portion of a second network packet into a plurality of integers, wherein the first network packet represents a communication from a first node to a second node, and wherein the second network packet represents a communication from the second node to the first node, wherein the combined packet comprises the plurality of integers; (c) obtaining a stored meta-expression that: comprises a plurality of integers in an order, and corresponds to presence of the network activity of interest in network traffic; (d) determining whether the meta-expression obtained in (c) appears in the combined packet created in (b); (e) in response to determining that the meta-expression obtained in (c) appears in the combined packet created in (b), initiating an operation.
 2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the determining comprises: determining whether the plurality of integers, which are ordered, of the meta-expression obtained in (c) appear in the combined packet created in (b) in the same order.
 3. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the operation includes filtering at least one of the obtained TCP packets or IP packets.
 4. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the operation includes cloaking a network node of the network that transmitted the obtained plurality of network packets.
 5. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the network activity of interest is an attack using a computer virus.
 6. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the creating of the combined packet comprises: identifying the first network packet, the first network packet representing a request; identifying the second network packet, the second network packet representing an acknowledgement, wherein the second network packet: occurs after the first network packet, and represents an acknowledgement corresponding to the first network packet; and identifying a third network packet wherein the third network packet occurs between the first network packet and the second network packet, and wherein the third network packet represents a communication between the first and second nodes.
 7. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein converting, bitwise, content comprises grouping at least a subset of the portion of the first network packet and at least a subset of the portion of the second network packet into integers.
 8. The computer-implemented method of claim 7, wherein the integers of the meta-expression and the integers of the combined packet are 8-bit integers.
 9. The computer-implemented method of claim 2, wherein the determining comprises: determining whether the plurality of integers, which are ordered, of the meta-expression obtained in (c) appear non-contiguously in the combined packet created in (b) in the same order.
 10. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein creating the combined packet comprises: identifying the first and second network packets from a network conversation between the first node and the second node.
 11. A networking device adapted to detect a network activity of interest, comprising: a network port adapted to connect to a network, wherein the network port is adapted to (a) obtain a plurality of network packets from the network, wherein the obtained plurality of network packets comprises network packets categorized as Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) packets and Internet Protocol (IP) packets, wherein the obtained plurality of network packets include the network activity of interest; one or more processors operatively coupled to the network port, wherein the processor is adapted to: (b) create a combined packet from at least two network packets of the plurality of network packets, wherein creating the combined packet comprises converting, bitwise, content from a portion of a first network packet and a portion of a second network packet into a plurality of integers, wherein the first network packet represents a communication from a first node to a second node, and wherein the second network packet represents a communication from the second node to the first node; (c) obtain a stored meta-expression that: comprises a plurality of integers in an order, and corresponds to presence of the network activity of interest in network traffic; (d) determine whether the meta-expression obtained in c) appears in the combined packet created in (b); and (e) in response to determining that the meta-expression obtained in (c) appears in the combined packet created in (b), initiating an operation; and a memory operatively coupled to the one or more processors, wherein the memory is adapted to store the meta-expression.
 12. The networking device of claim 11, wherein the determining comprises: determining whether the plurality of integers, which are ordered, of the meta-expression obtained in (c) appear in the combined packet created in (b) in the same order.
 13. The networking device of claim 11, wherein the operation includes filtering at least one of the obtained TCP packets or IP packets.
 14. The networking device of claim 11, wherein the operation includes cloaking a network node of the network.
 15. The networking device of claim 11, wherein the network activity of interest is an attack using a computer virus.
 16. The networking device of claim 11, wherein the creating of the combined packet comprises: identifying the first network packet, the first network packet representing a request; identifying the second network packet, the second network packet representing an acknowledgement, wherein the second network packet: occurs after the first network packet, and represents an acknowledgement corresponding to the first network packet; and identifying a third network packet wherein the third network packet occurs between the first network packet and the second network packet, and wherein the third network packet represents a communication between the first and second nodes.
 17. The networking device of claim 11, wherein: wherein converting, bitwise, content comprises grouping at least a subset of the portion of the first network packet and at least a subset of the portion of the second network packet into integers.
 18. The networking device of claim 17, wherein: wherein the plurality of integers of the obtained meta-expression and the integers of the combined packet are 8-bit integers.
 19. The networking device of claim 11, wherein the processor is further adapted to: if the plurality of integers of the obtained meta-expression appear in the combined packet in the same order, then determine that the network activity of interest is present in the obtained plurality of network packets.
 20. The networking device of claim 11, wherein the networking device is a router or a firewall.
 21. The networking device of claim 11, wherein the networking device is a modem.
 22. The networking device of claim 11, wherein the networking device is a cellular phone.
 23. The networking device of claim 11, wherein the networking device is a desktop computer, a laptop computer, or a tablet computer.
 24. The networking device of claim 1, wherein the determining comprises: determining whether the plurality of integers, which are ordered, of the meta-expression obtained in (c) appear non-contiguously in the combined packet created in (b) in the same order.
 25. The networking device of claim 11, wherein creating the combined packet comprises: identifying the first and second network packets from a network conversation between the first node and the second node.
 26. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having computer-executable instructions which, when executed by one or more computer processors, causes the one or more computer processors to detect a network activity of interest, the computer-executable instructions comprising instructions for: (a) obtaining a plurality of network packets from a network, wherein the obtained plurality of network packets comprises network packets categorized as Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) packets and Internet Protocol (IP) packets, wherein the obtained plurality of network packets include the network activity of interest; (b) creating a combined packet from at least two network packets of the plurality of network packets, wherein creating the combined packet comprises converting, bitwise, content from a portion of a first network packet and a portion of a second network packet into a plurality of integers, wherein the first network packet represents a communication from a first node to a second node, and wherein the second network packet represents a communication from the second node to the first node; (c) obtaining a meta-expression that: comprises a plurality of integers in an order, and corresponds to presence of the network activity of interest in network traffic; determining whether the meta-expression obtained in (c) appears in the combined packet created in (b); and initiating an operation based in response to determining that the meta-expressions obtained in (c) appears in the combined packet created in (b).
 27. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 26, wherein the determining comprises: determining whether the plurality of integers, which are ordered, of the meta-expression obtained in (c) appear in the combined packet created in (b) in the same order.
 28. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 26, wherein the operation includes filtering at least one of the obtained TCP packets or IP packets.
 29. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 26, wherein the operation includes cloaking a network node of the network.
 30. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 26, wherein the network activity of interest is an attack using a computer virus.
 31. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 26, wherein the instructions for creating of the combined packet comprises instructions for: identifying the first network packet, the first network packet representing a request; identifying the second network packet, the second network packet representing an acknowledgement, wherein the second network packet: occurs after the first network packet, and represents an acknowledgement corresponding to the first network packet; and identifying a third network packet wherein the third network packet occurs between the first network packet and the second network packet, and wherein the third network packet represents a communication between the first and second nodes.
 32. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 26, wherein the instructions for converting, bitwise, content comprises instructions for: grouping at least a subset of the portion of the first network packet and at least a subset of the portion of the second network packet into integers.
 33. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 32, and wherein the plurality of integers of the obtained meta-expression and the integers of the combined packet are 8-bit integers.
 34. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 26, further comprising instructions for: if the plurality of integers of the obtained meta-expression appear in the combined packet in the same order, then initiating the operation.
 35. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 26, further comprising instructions for: if the plurality of integers of the obtained meta-expression appear in the combined packet in the same order, then determining that the network activity of interest is present in the obtained plurality of network packets.
 36. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 26, wherein the determining comprises: determining whether the plurality of integers, which are ordered, of the meta-expression obtained in (c) appear non-contiguously in the combined packet created in (b) in the same order.
 37. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 26, wherein creating the combined packet comprises: identifying the first and second network packets from a network conversation between the first node and the second node. 